OverTheGeicoE writes: US Senator Susan Collins, the top Republican on the homeland security committee, plans to introduce a bill that would require a new health study of the X-ray body scanners used to screen airline passengers nationwide. If the bill becomes law, TSA would be required to choose an 'independent laboratory' to measure the radiation emitted by a scanner currently in use at an airport checkpoint and use the data to produce a peer-reviewed study, to be submitted to Congress, based on its findings. The study would also evaluate the safety mechanisms on the machine and determine 'whether there are any biological signs of cellular damage caused by the scans.' Many Slashdotters are or have been involved in science. Is this a credible experimental protocol? Is it reasonable to expect an organization accused of jeopardizing the health and safety of hundreds of millions of air travelers to pick a truly unbiased lab? Would any lab chosen deliver a critical report and risk future funding? Should the public trust a study of radiology and human health designed by a US Senator whose highest degree is a bachelor's degree in government?

Ask and ye shall receive, as I am an X-ray scientist with a physics background and I've written comments on this before. I work with material analyzers, primarily ultra-portable XRF and XRD devices used for a variety of applications. All our devices have warning labels and prompts for a reason. X-rays should not be taken as lightly as they are. Previous independent studies and tests used techniques used primarily of direct source X-rays. Those same studies themselves admitted that no acceptable method fo